JKP,
As to the question of whether things are split up or not, all one needs to do is look at VMs Aries and Taurus, and the a answer has to be 'yes', or at least a provisional 'yes', because 'absolutely not" has been ruled out by these illustrations. Whether that applies to text remains to seen. We don't have a way of knowing that things fit into place, like we do with the illustrations.
While I do believe that the focus needs to be on visual detail, I do not believe that this extends to the level of subtle, shall we call them internal?, variations in the VMs glyphs. I suppose researchers, who expect that the VMs author was a perfect scribe, are going to have difficulties. If s/he was just a normal writer, I would expect those variations. And the potential for variations in the material aspects is another factor.
The comparison or combination of paired text segments is an interesting possibility. The problem is in the selection of specimens. If the author wanted the reader to do a comparison or combination of particular text segments, what sort of construction could be put in place? And if the author's preference was for something more subtle and not glaringly obvious?? How about marked text segments? Or isolated text segments? How about marked and isolated text segments placed in unexpected locations? Is that too obvious? Perhaps from this set only certain ones are given another marker? Things don't need to diminish in size to be hidden, they just need to pass unrecognized.
Things just need to pass unrecognized, as they have been doing, and the secret is safe. Progress is blocked. But if it can be accepted that Oresme's cosmos can be duplicated with VMs parts, then this could be the start of a new perspective for VMs investigation. Does the VMs contain common information of the author's actual (European) culture, that has been disguised and made ambiguous through intentional manipulation - such as the separation of parts in the case of the cosmos? I believe it does and that the VMs provides confirmation in the details of the scallop-shell cloud bands in this case. Or in the use and placement of papelonny tub patterns in another example. Here we have traditional information from the field of heraldry used in a method common to heraldry (canting) in a time when this would have been standard practice for many. Whereas, from the modern view, these are unknown and difficult to discover symbols which cannot be interpreted due to the absence of any point of reference.
Happy boustrophedon.
As to the question of whether things are split up or not, all one needs to do is look at VMs Aries and Taurus, and the a answer has to be 'yes', or at least a provisional 'yes', because 'absolutely not" has been ruled out by these illustrations. Whether that applies to text remains to seen. We don't have a way of knowing that things fit into place, like we do with the illustrations.
While I do believe that the focus needs to be on visual detail, I do not believe that this extends to the level of subtle, shall we call them internal?, variations in the VMs glyphs. I suppose researchers, who expect that the VMs author was a perfect scribe, are going to have difficulties. If s/he was just a normal writer, I would expect those variations. And the potential for variations in the material aspects is another factor.
The comparison or combination of paired text segments is an interesting possibility. The problem is in the selection of specimens. If the author wanted the reader to do a comparison or combination of particular text segments, what sort of construction could be put in place? And if the author's preference was for something more subtle and not glaringly obvious?? How about marked text segments? Or isolated text segments? How about marked and isolated text segments placed in unexpected locations? Is that too obvious? Perhaps from this set only certain ones are given another marker? Things don't need to diminish in size to be hidden, they just need to pass unrecognized.
Things just need to pass unrecognized, as they have been doing, and the secret is safe. Progress is blocked. But if it can be accepted that Oresme's cosmos can be duplicated with VMs parts, then this could be the start of a new perspective for VMs investigation. Does the VMs contain common information of the author's actual (European) culture, that has been disguised and made ambiguous through intentional manipulation - such as the separation of parts in the case of the cosmos? I believe it does and that the VMs provides confirmation in the details of the scallop-shell cloud bands in this case. Or in the use and placement of papelonny tub patterns in another example. Here we have traditional information from the field of heraldry used in a method common to heraldry (canting) in a time when this would have been standard practice for many. Whereas, from the modern view, these are unknown and difficult to discover symbols which cannot be interpreted due to the absence of any point of reference.
Happy boustrophedon.